You Don’t Have to Buy the Whole Load (by John Wylie)

Twenty-five years ago this month I surrendered to the Gospel ministry. In 1992, what became known as the culture war was in full bloom. In fact, 1992 was the very year that Pat Buchanan gave his well known “culture war” speech at the Republican Convention. I was fully immersed in the idea that conservative politics and orthodox theology were synonymous. Twenty-five years down the road, the John Wylie of today is a bit more complex politically and even in some ways theologically. I have learned that monolithic thinking and uniformity are the enemies of honesty, progress (not liberalism), and liberty. Yet, among most orthodox Baptists I have found that uniformity politically is required for one not to be castigated, ridiculed, and rejected. If I could get in a time machine and have a meeting with a twenty-one-year-old preacher who bears the same name I do, I would tell him that he has the liberty to not buy into the whole load of any political agenda. I would tell him that sometimes honesty demands that he express disagreement even if it cost him a great deal with his so-called friends in the ministry.

The first thing that I would like to remind the brethren of is that the glue that binds us together is not politics, but theology. It’s the mutual faith that Paul spoke of in Romans chapter one that is the basis of our fellowship, not our voter registration cards. We fellowship around the things we believe about Christ, the Bible, sin, and salvation. We have codified those beliefs in doctrinal statements like the Baptist Faith and Message, and it has been my experience that when we expand those parameters that we always get into trouble, turmoil, and conflict. I have witnessed, and even been guilty myself of questioning a person’s Christianity based on who they voted for. Brothers and sisters, these things ought not to be!

The next thing I would like to remind the brethren of is that our Christianity does not preclude us being involved in politics and even using the political process in certain causes. Abortion, immigration, human trafficking, predatory lending, and a host of other issues are certainly worth our attention and political opinions to be brought to bear on. Some folks act as though involvement in politics is sinful or runs counter to the idea of being kingdom citizens, I do not believe that. If that were the case it would seem that Cornelius would have been advised by Peter to resign from the Roman army, and Sergius Paulus would have been advised by Paul to resign as proconsul of Paphos, neither appear to have done that.

The final thing that I would like to remind the brethren of is actually the main thrust of the article, that no political litmus test should be employed in our fellowship. A person can support a candidate and not support everything that the candidate stands for. In this last election, we lost sight of the fact that sincere Christians could vote for Trump, Clinton, a third party candidate, or not vote at all and be doing so based on religious conviction. You can actually be a Democrat and not support abortion, or several other sordid stances of the Democratic party. You can be a Republican and not support war, crony capitalism, or President Trump’s wall. I have found that this kind of liberty is not allowed with many in our fellowship, because the minute that one does not tow the party line on every issue, they are immediately marginalized and ridiculed. The most liberating thing that I can tell you is that you don’t have to buy the whole load! We don’t have to agree on immigration policy, the military, the budget, the Black Lives Matter movement, or any number of peripheral political issues. What we have to agree on in order to fellowship with one another is the faith once delivered to the saints. Please allow people to disagree without writing them off as a liberal, or a fundy, or a racist, or pro-Islamic.

Editor’s Note: John Wylie is the pastor of Springer Missionary Baptist Church in Springer, OK, and a frequent commenter here at Voices.

Share this:

Like this:

Related

Balanced and brilliant. If taken to heart & practiced by all believers, no matter which ballot box or booth they stand in at voting time, we could once again become united as a convention, perhaps begin healing the racial divide, and advance the Kingdom of God. Your post is a practical outworking of Jesus’ prayer for unity in John 17: 21. Given the state of our country & Convention, your post, is a word fitly spoken. Amen.

I agree John. Good post. I don’t want to point your post in a different direction but there are several areas this is true besides politics. If you came into the convention 10 years earlier you could substitute the conservative resurgence for Republican party. Many sound theological conservatives were castigated, ridiculed, and rejected because they would not go along with the political activity of the CR. You could be a conservative and vote for Richard Jackson instead of Jerry Vines but that meant you would not be trusted to serve as a trustee or get invited to a speak at a pastor’s conference. You could say our missionaries were sound theologically but that would mean you couldn’t be trusted by leaders of the CR to toe the party line.

Excellent comments on the “linkage” and “non-linkage” between politics and Christianity.

Within recent days I’m waking up to the likelihood that some of the purported problems between the ERLC and sectors of the SBC constituency is in actuality a proxy war between the conflicting camps of Republicans vs. Democrats within evangelical Christianity. Politics and religion don’t mix well if political views trump [pun intended] Christian ethics and morality.

If neither Trump and Hillary were on the presidential ballot [with their assortment of anti-Christian baggage] and if SBC leaders studiously avoided saying anything pro or con regarding any politician then we would not be in the current situation. The XComm would not be looking into why we have all friction.

The SBC is not the religious arm of any political party. So I think pastors or SBC leaders should not be part of “advisory boards” for political candidates. Because doing so serves to artificially emphasize the role of politics in spreading the gospel. If a guy wants to become part of some campaign then he should be prepared for pushback from other Christians. This is because in the polarized society we have today taking any type of political or quasi-political stand is walking into quicksand.

[1] What if Dr. Moore would not have said anything regarding Trump and/or people supporting Trump? Then there would be more bandwidth left to actually focus on the Gospel instead of bickering.

[2] What if some other SBC leaders would have abstained from becoming Trump Cheerleaders? Then there would be more bandwidth left to actually focus on the Gospel instead of bickering.

Roger OKC

March 9, 2017 9:17 am

Roger

Replace “. . . all friction.” with “. . . all this friction.”

Sorry for the typo

March 9, 2017 9:23 am

John Wylie

Thanks for your reply, Roger. I want to make it clear that I am not espousing abandoning the use of politics here. Sometimes politics are a necessary evil in having a more just society. The 13th Amendment to the Constitution was accomplished through politics.

What I am saying is that we do not have to agree on every political issue in order to accept one another. There must be some room to disagree without being excommunicated.

Good points, Roger. Though to Moore’s defense he was addressing the current political situation with specificity as it applied to this particular election. His comments about Trump’s supporters were generalized but with regard to certain public leaders, not the whole of his base. I will say that Dr. Mohler is perhaps often better at being diplomatic and more broad, but if that is the extent of Russell Moore’s mistake, it’s very minor IMHO.

We should stop talking about Politics and talk about Principles. Keep the focus there.

March 9, 2017 3:23 pm

John Wylie

Thanks Jim,

You’ve essentially captured what I was getting at. We must get to the principles behind people’s political or non political actions. I believe that if you get to the heart of the matter we will cut each other a lot more slack.

March 9, 2017 3:42 pm

eric c

John, I have voted in elections since Richard Nixon and been an active member of the SBC before then. I think that many people that post here and the leadership of the SBC way over estimate the impact of their political/social views on the membership. I did not agree with the Moral Majority organization and methodology because it was not needed. If you went to church, Bible study and read the Bible you should have the tools to vote for the candidate you feel qualified using your faith base center core to make the political vote for people to govern our nation. I never felt compelled, urged, threatened, intimidated , ridiculed and directed to vote a certain way by any local church I attended.
I have seen and been given “comparsion” info guides that compared issues of Christian concern mostly religious liberty and abortion being the main issue. Never felt pressure or any sense of being mandated as a Christian to follow those recommendations. Now this was in the hay day of the Moral Majority, so again I think the power of this group was way overblown. On quite a few blogs here there is a lot of commentary on the blowback toward the ERLC and especially Dr. Moore for his views, opinions and involvement in the recent Presidential election. I know you did not reference Dr. Moore situation but it is so relevant to your point. In my view Dr. Moore should not have taken such a harsh partisan stand, not needed. If a Pastor preaches from the Bible , the people listen to the Bible then they will vote correctly. In my church the majority I would guess voted for Trump but the 30 percent who did not were not offended, ridiculed , harassed or it was a major point because we knew our focus is the Gospel and we can differ politically. If anything politics came up casually and not an overriding issue. As I have stated in previous post I do not believe the ERLC serves a purpose . A nice thoughtful blog and no one can disagree with your premise.

March 9, 2017 11:06 am

Wm. Dwight McKissic, Sr.

Eric,

“If a Pastor preached from the Bible, the people the people listen to the Bible then they will vote correctly.”

This statement suggests that there is a “correct” way that all Baptists or Christians should vote. Each individual has to determine what’s correct for themselves.
What’s correct for u, may not be correct for me & vice versa. What most Southern Baptists White Rebulicans find to be correct, most Southern Baptists African Americans find incorrect. So it is not as simple as u make it sound. Even in the same church as u just pointed out, there can be significant differences of opinion on what’s considered correct. The mindset has to change to, I will respect your choice & ur reasons for making that choice, even when I make a different choice for my particular reasons. Christians who prioritize justice issues, equality issues, race issues-as they perceive them-or economic justice/relief for the poor etc, as priority issues when determining voting; their choice must be respected as the person who votes Republican based on their set of priorities. To label one “correct,” by default is to label the other incorrect. That’s where the division comes in, and explains the current divide in the Convention.

March 9, 2017 11:34 am

John Wylie

Joe,
There are too many places in the scriptures that tell us how the Lord feels about some of these social issues and our call to help in those areas to simply ignore them.

The point of this post is that we don’t have to agree with each other on every point. I, for instance, disagree with most conservatives on the issues of immigration, and predatory lending. I still consider myself conservative.

March 9, 2017 1:10 pm

eric c

Wm. Dwight, Thanks for your reply to my comment. You are correct, I worded it poorly, you nailed it , correct for the individual not what others may believe in the correct vote. I have many friends in Bible study who came from up North, union people, vote influenced by their life, work experience. They know Christian values , they voted for H. Clinton, for them that is correct at this point of time. I think you surmised what I was trying to convey by your comments. In 2012 same group had some people who just could vote for Romney based on what they perceived as their Christian values. I voted for Romney, they are still my friends because that is politics maybe we have different political family but you know as a Pastor we are in the most important family as believers. You fleshed out my comment better than I , thanks

March 9, 2017 7:55 pm

Allen Calkins

I personally do not know a single SBC Pastor who would disagree with that statement. Even if the law was changed to allow it, I would NEVER endorse a candidate as Pastor. But I will preach passionately concerning the moral issues that should direct us in our political affiliations…Abortion is one…The gay agenda is another…The war on Christianity is yet another…People of influence making unproven accusations about a flawed candidate is not.